An Alternative History

[mr_gyptian]

This is from The New Republic's website, specifically Easterblogg. It is Gregg Easterbrook's weblog. Just thought it was interesting.

AN ALTERNATIVE HISTORY: washington, april 9, 2004. A hush fell over the city as George W. Bush today became the first president of the United States ever to be removed from office by impeachment. Meeting late into the night, the Senate unanimously voted to convict Bush following a trial on his bill of impeachment from the House.

Moments after being sworn in as the 44th president, Dick Cheney said that disgraced former national security adviser Condoleezza Rice would be turned over to the Hague for trial in the International Court of Justice as a war criminal. Cheney said Washington would "firmly resist" international demands that Bush be extradited for prosecution as well.

On August 7, 2001, Bush had ordered the United States military to stage an all-out attack on alleged terrorist camps in Afghanistan. Thousands of U.S. special forces units parachuted into this neutral country, while air strikes targeted the Afghan government and its supporting military. Pentagon units seized abandoned Soviet air bases throughout Afghanistan, while establishing support bases in nearby nations such as Uzbekistan. Simultaneously, FBI agents throughout the United States staged raids in which dozens of men accused of terrorism were taken prisoner.

Reaction was swift and furious. Florida Senator Bob Graham said Bush had "brought shame to the United States with his paranoid delusions about so-called terror networks." British Prime Minister Tony Blair accused the United States of "an inexcusable act of conquest in plain violation of international law." White House chief counterterrorism advisor Richard Clarke immediately resigned in protest of "a disgusting exercise in over-kill."

When dozens of U.S. soldiers were slain in gun battles with fighters in the Afghan mountains, public opinion polls showed the nation overwhelmingly opposed to Bush's action. Political leaders of both parties called on Bush to withdraw U.S. forces from Afghanistan immediately. "We are supposed to believe that attacking people in caves in some place called Tora Bora is worth the life of even one single U.S. soldier?" former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey asked.

When an off-target U.S. bomb killed scores of Afghan civilians who had taken refuge in a mosque, Spanish Prime Minister Jose Aznar announced a global boycott of American products. The United Nations General Assembly voted to condemn the United States, and Washington was forced into the humiliating position of vetoing a Security Council resolution declaring America guilty of "criminal acts of aggression."

Bush justified his attack on Afghanistan, and the detention of 19 men of Arab descent who had entered the country legally, on grounds of intelligence reports suggesting an imminent, devastating attack on the United States. But no such attack ever occurred, leading to widespread ridicule of Bush's claims. Speaking before a special commission created by Congress to investigate Bush's anti-terrorism actions, former national security adviser Rice shocked and horrified listeners when she admitted, "We had no actionable warnings of any specific threat, just good reason to believe something really bad was about to happen."

The president fired Rice immediately after her admission, but this did little to quell public anger regarding the war in Afghanistan. When it was revealed that U.S. special forces were also carrying out attacks against suspected terrorist bases in Indonesia and Pakistan, fury against the United States became universal, with even Israel condemning American action as "totally unjustified."

Speaking briefly to reporters on the South Lawn of the White House before a helicopter carried him out of Washington as the first-ever president removed by impeachment, Bush seemed bitter. "I was given bad advice," he insisted. "My advisers told me that unless we took decisive action, thousands of innocent Americans might die. Obviously I should not have listened."

Announcing his candidacy for the 2004 Republican presidential nomination, Senator John McCain said today that "George W. Bush was very foolish and naïve; he didn't realize he was being pushed into this needless conflict by oil interests that wanted to seize Afghanistan to run a pipeline across it." McCain spoke at a campaign rally at the World Trade Center in New York City.

posted 10:57 a.m.

E-mail Easterblogg
Return to the top of the page.

[KQ]

http://politicalhumor.about.com/libr..._thiefliar.jpg

[splat]

............and with the Anti-Christ firmly entrenched to inherit the most powerful position in the world, US citizens were escorted by armed guards to the local implantation centers set up nationwide to get their complimentary "patriot chips" and retinal scans.

A charming saga with a predictable plot and happy ending.

[grrrr]

Too bad we don't have an alternative reality:

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- When the United States invaded Iraq more than a year ago, one of its chief concerns was preventing a civil war between Shiite Muslims, who make up a majority in the country, and Sunni Muslims, who held all the power under Saddam Hussein.

Now the fear is that the growing uprising against the U.S.-led occupation is forging a new and previously unheard-of level of cooperation between the two groups -- and the common cause is killing Americans.

"We have orders from our leader to fight as one and to help the Sunnis," said Nimaa Fakir, a 27-year-old teacher and foot soldier in the Mahdi Army, a Shiite militia. "We want to increase the fighting, increase the killing and drive the Americans out. To do this, we must combine forces."

This new Shiite-Sunni partnership was flourishing in Baghdad yesterday. Convoys of pickups with signature Shiite flags flapping from bumpers hauled sacks of grain, flour, sugar and rice into Sunni mosques.

The food donations were coming from Shiite families, in many cases from people with little to spare. And they were headed to the besieged residents of Fallujah, a city that has now become the icon of the resistance, especially after Wednesday's bombing of a mosque compound there.

"Sunni, Shia, that doesn't matter anymore," said Sabah Saddam, a 32-year-old government clerk who took the day off to drive one of the supply trucks. "These were artificial distinctions. The people in Fallujah are starving. They are Iraqis and they need our help."

But it is not just relief aid that is flowing into the city.

According to militia members, many Shiite fighters are streaming into Fallujah to help Sunni insurgents repel an assault by U.S. Marines. Groups of young men with guns are taking buses from Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad to the outskirts of Fallujah and then slipping past checkpoints to join the action.

U.S. leaders had been concerned that the rival sectarian groups would not find a common cause. Now, it seems, they have found a common enemy.



"The danger is we believe there is a linkage that may be occurring at the very lowest levels between the Sunni and the Shia," Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez, commander of the occupation forces, said yesterday. "We have to work very hard to ensure that it remains at the tactical level."

He also said the call for unity is "clearly an attempt to take advantage of the situation."

Brig. Gen. Mark Hertling, an assistant commander of the 1st Armored Division, said the military intelligence indicated there might be some loose coordination between the renegade Shiite movement of Muqtada al-Sadr and a Sunni extremist group called Mohammed's Army in the western portions of Baghdad.

He said 1st Armored and 1st Cavalry troops were conducting reconnaissance and operations against fighters from both groups, who have converged on the road to Fallujah.

Fallujah, 35 miles west of Baghdad, is in its fifth day of siege. Marines are trying to root out insurgents after four American security guards were ambushed there last week and their bodies were mutilated by a mob. According to people inside Fallujah, the situation is grim and getting grimmer.

"It's a disaster," said Sheik Ghazi Al Abid, a wealthy tribal leader, who was reached by telephone. "There's no food, no water, no electricity."

The sheikh said it was so dangerous, bodies have been left on the streets because people are terrified to venture outside to collect them.

The sheikh said more than 300 people have been killed, hundreds more wounded, and medical supplies and blood are running low. "There are so many injured civilians," the sheikh said, "they don't know where to go."

In Baghdad, blood banks were packed. Imams at both Sunni and Shiite mosques put out a message during the call to prayer that Fallujah residents needed blood fast. Yesterday, a group of Shiite men formed a line at one Baghdad blood bank that wended out the door. The men were ready to get pricked with a needle for their Sunni brothers.

"We share a cause now," said Mohammed Majid, a taxi driver. "Why not share our bodies?"

Pentagon officials said they had no definitive figures on the size or scale of the Sunni or Shiite militias. That is largely because the militia movement seems too fluid, and is split among factions.

Shiite extremist groups have a long tradition of hiding their true strength, in large part because their history has been marked by persecution by Sunni elites in many Muslim countries. In southern Lebanon in the 1980s, for example, the CIA was never able to get solid estimates of the number of Shiite fighters involved in Hezbollah or the Islamic resistance that eventually forced the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, former U.S. intelligence officials said.

[PaSucks]

Originally posted by grrrr
Too bad we don't have an alternative reality:

I think you missed the point of that article. To me it is saying Bush was damned if he did, and he is damned now that he didn't. It is showing how Bush would have been persecuted out of office and tried as a criminal if he had acted on the inteligence reports prior to 911. The author's oppinion is that had Bush used the millitary and actually prevented the horrific acts of 911 he would have been thrown to the dogs for bieng a supposed tyrant and a murderer. So basically he is screwed either way.

[KQ]

Originally posted by PaSucks
I think you missed the point of that article. To me it is saying Bush was damned if he did, and he is damned now that he didn't. It is showing how Bush would have been persecuted out of office and tried as a criminal if he had acted on the inteligence reports prior to 911. The author's oppinion is that had Bush used the millitary and actually prevented the horrific acts of 911 he would have been thrown to the dogs for bieng a supposed tyrant and a murderer. So basically he is screwed either way.

It's very simplistic in it's view. Measures could have been undertaken to lessen the threat without going to war or restricting our civil liberties.

[grrrr]

No, I didn't miss the point of the article. I was pointing out that speculating on woulda-coulda-shoulda fantasies doesn't erase the harsh reality of what is happening.

Frankly, that first article ranks right up with "Finding Nemo".

[Woodsy]

thats an excellent point about 9-11.

it has nothing to do with the debacle in Iraq, that is taking time, money & manpower away from the real war on terror & you how many time Arab TV will showw that 500 pound bomb hitting the wall of that Mosque?


that is a recruitment tool for terror's future.

we should have stayed on task

[lemon boy]

at least there were some lessons to learn in finding nemo

[KQ]

Originally posted by Woodsy
thats an excellent point about 9-11.

it has nothing to do with the debacle in Iraq, that is taking time, money & manpower away from the real war on terror & you how many time Arab TV will showw that 500 pound bomb hitting the wall of that Mosque?


that is a recruitment tool for terror's future.

we should have stayed on task

Yup - stirrin' up the hornets nest is all were doing.

Q: Prior to going to Iraq did certain terrorist groups hate us and attack us?

A: Yes

Q: Now that we are in Iraq - do certain terrorist groups hate us and attack us?

A: Yes

Q: has anything changed other than 600 plus of our ppl dying and countless Iraqis?

A: No.

[Viva]

Originally posted by KQ
Q: has anything changed other than 600 plus of our ppl dying and countless Iraqis?

A: No.

Wrong, we have more enemies willing to attack us now...

edit- Woodsey said it first.

editII- and now the Spanish and maybe, but hopefully not, the Japanese people are tweaked at us now that their people are dying.

[Woodsy]

Originally posted by KQ
Q: has anything changed other than 600 plus of our ppl dying and countless Iraqis?

A: No.

wrong we are proving to the mderates that extremists were right all along, we will bomb Mosques & attack Clerics.

We are for freedom of the press, as long as it is positive towards us
(the recent blood bath is from Breeer not liking his depiction in a paper pulished by Muqtada al-Sadr. His Mehdi army was brought together to maintain order after the chaos the US caused & only attacked us after we declared him a criminal.)

we want elections as long as we dont think a Muslim government will win.

The world is less safe now than it was a year ago

[KQ]

Originally posted by Woodsy
wrong we are proving to the mderates that extremists were right all along, we will bomb Mosques & attack Clerics.

We are for freedom of the press, as long as it is positive towards us
(the recent blood bath is from Breeer not liking his depiction in a paper pulished by Muqtada al-Sadr. His Mehdi army was brought together to maintain order after the chaos the US caused & only attacked us after we declared him a criminal.)

we want elections as long as we dont think a Muslim government will win.

The world is less safe now than it was a year ago

Should have said:

"Has anything changed for the better?"

[mr_gyptian]

but it's ok that they snipe at us from said Mosques??

things that have changed:

1. Libya has allowed inspectors and is making its first attempt at being a positively contributing member in the world community in I don't know how long.

2. Iran...ditto.

3. Demonstrations for democracy in Syria and Iran.

4. Iraqi's have a constitution that stresses many of the same freedoms and rights we hold dear. Hospitals that have post early 70s technology and practices. A police force being trained that is not a secret police. new school books that don't teach the idolatry of Saddam.


I could go on. but I've no doubt it would fall on deaf ears. However, chew on this. This is Sadr's last gasp, there will be a successful turn over on June 30.

The economy will continue to improve. all of the sudden the lagging indicator...jobs. isn't lagging anymore. people are getting their enlarged refunds. They will continue to find out that their civil rights aren't being infringed upon. Kerry will continue to demagogue the Republicans, specifically GWB, all the while never coming up with any ideas of his own on how he would chang things. Ted Kennedy will keep inflating, making parallels between Iraq and Vietnam. (BTW, did he mean JFK's Vietnam, LBJ's Vietnam, or Nixon's Vietnam). Finally, on the first Tuesday of November the Bush/Cheney ticket will Kerry and his running mate in Reagan/Bush '84 fashion.

FOUR MORE YEARS.

[PaSucks]

mr_gyptian, I like how you think!

[joshbu]

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
but it's ok that they snipe at us from said Mosques??

<snip panglossian blabber>

I do agree with you on one point: Bush will most likely win again. I really do admire how efficent the Bush disinformation machine is. I think his work is right up there with McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover in that respect. Props to him for that. The American public shouldn't be so easy to snowball, but hey, we're getting what we deserve in that case.

[mr_gyptian]

josh, the proper nomenclature is neo-mccarthyism.

[joshbu]

Wonderful. I'm glad we have words to describe it.

I have to say, the thing that has pissed me off the most about the Bush's administration isn't Iraq, or the war on terrorism, or redistributing wealth towards the rich or any of that.

I'm stomping mad how partisan the country has been. The neo-mccarthiest attitude of "fall in line or get steam rolled" has left a lot of people feeling disinfrachised with their government. That's where all of the anger towards Bush come from. Maybe that anger will be enought to carry Kerry into the white house. Maybe not.

Either way, the party not in power is going to stonewall, obstruct, and fillabuster like mad. They'll have to: that will be their mandate from the pissed off voters.

It used to be that this nation was built on comprimise and cordial debate. That's how we found the center and thereby the real will of the people. (Which neither the Democrats or the Republicans fully encapsulate, or could possibly encapsulate, as the center is often conflicting and inconsistant.)

It seems that mass media has finally squashed all of that and all we are left with is WWF politics.

Now all that's left to see is who is going to take the belt.

[Slurred Elevens]

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
the proper nomenclature is...

the proper nomenclature to accurately describe you mr. gyptian is neo-reactionary jackass.. too bad you weren't born in the 11th century where you would be surrounded by like minded, biased a-holes.

[mr_gyptian]

I am the Walrus

[joshbu]

Originally posted by Slurred Elevens
the proper nomenclature to accurately describe you mr. gyptian is neo-reactionary jackass.. too bad you weren't born in the 11th century where you would be surrounded by like minded, biased a-holes.

q.e.d.

btw. Slurred: the 11th century was a time of great learning in China and Persian. Also, you don't have to be a right winger to be biased ass-hole.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Originally posted by joshbu
I do agree with you on one point: Bush will most likely win again.

I really hope you're wrong, and I've believed for the past several years that Bush will lose this fall.
Iraq ain't getting any better any time soon, and while it may be difficult to attack Bush too overtly on that, America isn't blind to the idiocy that Bush led us into. I don't see the economy really adding jobs the way Bush needs it to, people do realize how fiscally reckless Bush and the Republicans are, and that should be enough right there to get someone competent into the White House.
As for a late October Osama surprise (I mean a capture, not an attack), well, I'm not factoring that in...

[mr_gyptian]

scoreboard Dex, 308,000 jobs added. they also revised the previous two months upward.

[Mrs Roo]

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
but it's ok that they snipe at us from said Mosques??

things that have changed:

1. Libya has allowed inspectors and is making its first attempt at being a positively contributing member in the world community in I don't know how long.

Na, Gadafi hasn't changed. There's a very good reason why he's now reluctantly cooperating, not that we are privy to it. I say reluctant because of the snub he gave to Tony Blair on his recent visit. You may or may not have heard about it in the US but there were photos of him showing Blair the sole of his shoe which in Islamic society is only one step down from a physical attack. He's making it very clear, to a knowing eye, that he's only playing along.

Things may have changed but not through genuine goodwill towards us.

[mr_gyptian]

where does it rank as far as...say strapping dynamite to your chest and blowing up innocents in a pizza parlor. Or say blowing up a plane killing 203 in the air and 17 on the ground.

I'll take the sole of a shoe any time. regardless, I think Gadhafi is no longer in control of the country. his son is calling the shots. he was educated in London, right?